NATIONS BACK BAN ON ATOMIC DUMPING

By DAVID E. PITT

Published: November 13, 1993

Capping a series of actions hailed by environmentalists as a turning point in the protection of the world's oceans, the United States and 36 other governments voted yesterday to impose a permanent, legally binding ban on the dumping of all types of radioactive waste at sea.

The vote to ban dumping of low-level radioactive wastes came at a meeting in London of 42 of the 71 nations that signed a 1972 treaty on ocean dumping. Five of the countries represented at the meeting -- Russia, Britain, France, China and Belgium -- abstained from the vote.

On Thursday the signers of the treaty also approved two less intensely debated measures, approving permanent prohibitions on ocean dumping of toxic industrial wastes and waste incineration at sea. The agreement's "black list" of prohibited materials already includes highly radioactive wastes.

Diplomats say the actions will transform the treaty -- known as the London Convention -- from an agreement regulating marine dumping to one aimed at preventing the practice whenever there is reasonable doubt about its ecological soundness. Modest Step, Big Problem

In terms of the overall problem of ocean pollution, the bans constitute a modest step: deliberate dumping of nuclear and toxic industrial wastes at sea constitutes only about 10 percent of the total that enters the ocean. Up to 80 percent originates from such sources as raw sewage, airborne wastes and runoff of pesticides and fertilizer.

But environmental groups believe that the governments' actions in London this week are a sign that they may eventually come to grips with the much larger problem of land-based marine pollution, which Clifton Curtis, a treaties expert with Greenpeace International, described as "far more complicated in technical, legal, political and economic terms."

"What they did here is a sign of a real commitment to view the oceans very differently than before," Mr. Curtis said in a telephone interview from London, where Greenpeace -- which began campaigning for permanent dumping bans 15 years ago -- was monitoring the conference. "It sends a very positive signal."

Any of the 71 signatories, including the 5 that abstained from yesterday's vote, have the right to refuse to comply with changes to the treaty if they file notice within 100 days. The measure approved yesterday replaces a 10-year-old nonbinding moratorium. It is to take effect in 100 days, and includes a provision for a scientific review after 25 years.

Russia, which has been dumping nuclear wastes into the ocean for decades, said it would have to resume dumping low-level radioactive garbage after 18 months unless it receives assistance from the West to build more land-based storage areas.

The plea for aid was dismissed as unconvincing by the chief American delegate, David A. Colson, who noted that Russia spends "enormous sums of money" on its nuclear fleet.

"You will not convince me, and you will not convince the American people, that if the Russian Government so chose, it could not reallocate its priorities and immediately build and quickly have in place adequate storage and processing facilities," Mr. Colson told delegates on Thursday.

Adoption of the ban comes less than a month after a Russian tanker, shadowed by a Greenpeace vessel, pumped more than 900 tons of low-level waste into a squid-fishing ground in the Sea of Japan. The episode, days after the Japanese and Russian Governments had pledged a new era of cooperation, set off a storm of protest. Soon after, on Oct. 21, Japan announced that it would support a permanent ban. Clinton Shifts U.S. Policy

On Nov. 1, a Clinton Administration official disclosed that, after nearly a year of deliberations, it had decided to reverse American policy and also support such a ban. Participants in the London meeting said the shift, championed by the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, was a decisive factor in yesterday's vote.

The decision in London follows years of controversy over the suspected -- but still largely unproven -- dangers of dumping of low-level radioactive wastes on marine ecosystems. Proponents of the ban argued that the wastes could be retransmitted to humans through the food chain. They also warned that it was risky to dump radioactive material without means to monitor and, if necessary, retrieve it.

The ban, originally proposed by Denmark, is in line with a measure approved at the so-called Earth Summit in Brazil last year, when 172 governments urged the treaty signatories to consider banning low-level dumping as a precaution.

But Britain and France, which fought an 11th-hour battle for a compromise short of a permanent ban, questioned whether low-level waste dumping posed a real danger, and complained that a permanent prohibition would complicate the problem of what to do with growing accumulations of low-level wastes, much of it from decommissioned submarines, nuclear power plants and hospitals.